To elect a Vice-Chair for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2024/2025

Councillor L Gillham was elected as Vice-Chair for the remainder of the Municipal Year 2024/25.

Councillor T Gracey substituted for Councillor S Jenkins.

To confirm and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 30 January 2025 (Appendix A), and those of the Sub-Committee held on 28 January 2025 (Appendix B).

The Minutes of the meetings of the Sub-Committee held on 28 January 2025, and those of the Committee held on 30 January 2025 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor J Furey.

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests or other registrable and non-registrable interests in items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Committee reviewed progress with the Internal Audit programme for 2024/25.

Officers reported that to date 35% of the plan was complete, with the actual stakeholder satisfaction level resting at 98%.  One further audit had been issued since the last meeting, on Information Governance, which had a ‘reasonable’ outcome.  In Quarter 3 draft audit reports on Savings Realisation, Tree Safety, and Disabled Facility Grants had been issued, and reports were pending for Accounts Receivable and Debt Management, and Housing Health and Safety.  In Quarter 4 audits would take place for Workforce Planning, Housing repairs, Community Safety, and Cyber Security.  The one legacy recommendation outstanding in respect of an HR upgrade was expected to be complete by the end of March 2025.

Officers were asked to investigate Councillor S Whyte’s enquiry with regard to receipt of the SIAP satisfaction survey as soon as possible.

SIAP would be presenting their annual assurance report to the next scheduled meeting in May.

The report was duly noted.

The Committee’s approval was sought in respect of SIAP’s Internal Audit Charter and Plan for 2025/26.

Officers reported that the charter reflected the new Global Internal Audit Standards in the UK Public Sector.  The charter covered in detail, the auditor’s mandate in line with the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2015, their authority, roles and responsibilities, resources and various governance arrangements under which SIAP operated and their relationship with the Standards and Audit Committee and the Council in general.

The Committee was very content with the clarity and purpose of the charter.

In respect of the Internal Audit Plan for 2025/26, SIAP were confident that it was achievable in the allocated 195 days, but also flexible should priorities change.  Members were pleased that monitoring local government re-organisation was a factor in the plan.  There were 17 audits planned for 2025/26 across the areas of corporate governance, Financial, IT, Climate Change, Health and Wellbeing and Organisational Development.

The Committee noted that all audits were risk based and ranked as either high or medium priority.

With regard to specific audits, Members were re-assured that the planned audit on playgrounds in Quarter 3 would include a value for money assessment of contract management in the context of inspections, repairs and maintenance.

For Quarter 1 SIAP would be concentrating on audits of the financial management system, the Environment Act 2021, and Asset Management.

Resolved that –

the Internal Audit Charter and Internal Audit Plan for 2025/26 be approved

The Committee’s approval was sought for the Council’s Accounting Policies for the financial year 2024/25.

Officers advised that the Council’s Accounting Policies set the specific rules and practices, applied in preparing and presenting the Council’s financial statements.

Members noted that the application of most accounting policies was applied consistently from year to year.  However, changes were required when new accounting regulations were introduced, or if there was a significant change within the financial activities of the Council.

The introduction of International Financial Reporting Standard 16: on Leases, necessitated an amendment of the Council's Accounting Policies for the current year and the appropriate changes, which followed regulations were detailed in the report.

Officers went on to explain that the intention of IFRS16, which was introduced in the private sector several years ago, was primarily to remove the anomalies of organisations renting the main items they use for undertaking their business, without recording them on the balance sheet.  As a result of the new standard, all leases and “right of use assets” would now appear on the Balance Sheet as though they had been bought and financed from borrowing.

Officers cited Chertsey Museum as an example of a leased property that was not currently recorded in the balance sheet but instead the annual lease cost was charged to the Community Services budget.   Going forward, the building would appear in the balance sheet as though the Council had purchased it by borrowing.

A full explanation of the changes would be included in new disclosure notes in the Statement of Accounts.

Resolved that –

the Council’s accounting policies for the financial year 2024/25, as set out in Appendix A to the Officer’s report, be approved

The Committee’s approval was sought of a document required by Grant Thornton, the Council’s external auditors, called “Informing the Audit Risk Assessment” which the auditors used to plan their audit work for the year.

The assessment had been introduced in response to revised financial reporting standards, reported to a previous meeting of the Committee.  Officers advised that ensuring a risk-based approach meant that audit resources would be directed appropriately, supporting a value for money approach to auditing.

Officers had completed a Risk Assessment which was set out in full, including the auditor’s questions and management responses to them.  Members were invited to review the document which was split into the following headings: general, fraud, law and regulations, related parties, going concern, and accounting estimates.

The Committee agreed that the document demonstrated an effective channel of communication between Grant Thornton and the Council and did not have any amendments to make before approving the document accordingly.

Resolved that –

the document ‘Informing the audit risk assessment for Runnymede Borough Council 2024/25’ be approved, and the external auditors be notified if there are any additional matters that the Committee considers may also impact on the planned audit work and context for the financial year ending 31 March 2025

The Committee, in its role of overseeing the Council’s Complaints Policy and procedures, was provided with a summary of the complaints and compliments received between October and December 2024 (Quarter 3) and an update on any significant items arising after the last meeting in January.

The results for quarter 3 were set out in the report, noting that there were 79 entries for complaints and 9 compliments recorded for the reporting period.  Members noted that Officers had now found a way to record the average number of working days to respond to complaints at stages 1 and 2.

A change to the procedure was to take the date of receipt as the time from which deadlines were calculated to reflect the fact that an automated response to the customer was generated on the date of receipt.  This was in line with a number of other local authorities and both anticipated and was found to reflect updated guidance from the Ombudsman.

Officers reported that the number of outstanding complaints had fallen from 31 to 13 from Quarter 3 which demonstrated significant headway in dealing with the backlog.

The complaints by service area were stable and ward based information showed no significant patterns or trends.

The Committee was pleased with the inclusion of service improvements in the report, another requirement of the Ombudsman’s reporting framework, which continued to be well documented by complaint handlers.  The commitment to more effective communication with regard to refuse and recycling services at Christmas was welcomed.  Members hoped this would see the return of the collection calendars which used to be delivered to households across the borough.

Members noted the modest number of compliments in Quarter 3, including the detailed praise of the Council’s housing benefits service.  Compliments generally were fairly evenly spread across departments.

Officers advised that since the last meeting the Ombudsman had issued a suite of new and updated guidance.  It was reported that these had been developed using feedback mainly from the councils officially piloting the complaint handling code.

Officers drew the Committee’s attention to the Ombudsman’s new performance report template and how this differed from what was currently reported on.  In addition, Members noted a detailed set of explanatory notes for the new requirements.  Officers were examining these and assessing what the implications would be for the Council’s Corporate Leadership Team to consider and how it might impact on complaint handlers and jadu.

Officers highlighted that new data requested included excluded complaints which went beyond third party complaint recording such as those referred to the county council.  The various reasons for exclusion of a complaint were noted which would require some thought as to how best to start recording that level of detail.

A further category of complaint outcomes had been introduced which was called ‘resolved’, where the organisation had agreed a resolution without having to investigate.  This was already partly captured in ‘general responses’ where typically, Customer Services had dealt with the complaint without needing input from the department.  Some updated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

The Committee was asked to review and endorse the first annual report of the Standards and Audit Committee.  This is recommended best practice from CIPFA to local authorities, designed to provide assurance to those charged with governance that the Committee fulfils its purpose and can demonstrate its impact both internally and to the public.  The CIPFA position statement was appended to the Officer’s report.

The annual report set out the Committee’s:

·         terms of reference

·         membership details

·         highlights, and a summary of work undertaken during the year

·         a focus on external and internal audit

·         the governance framework

·         oversight of complaint handling

·         risk management

·         external review and self-assessment

·         performance and effectiveness

Officers highlighted some of the major pieces of work for the Committee during the year which illustrated its increased profile with particular regard to improved risk reporting, and dealing with the Best Value Notice response programme.

Prior to its submission to the full Council, Officers agreed to reflect the election of Councillor Gillham as the new Vice-Chair of the Committee at paragraph 2.3 of the annual report.

An area of continued concern was signing off the previous external auditor’s reports, an update on which was imminently expected.  Officers were asked to expedite the letters in respect of the former External Auditors, which it had been agreed would be produced at a previous meeting, publish them on the Council’s website and share with the Committee any subsequent feedback arising therefrom.

Recommend to full Council that –

the Standards and Audit Committee Annual Report 2024/25, as amended, be endorsed and referred to full Council for approval

The Committee conducted its first annual self-assessment of its effectiveness, using a survey produced by CIPFA which contained key indicators across the audit spectrum to help the Committee evaluate its performance, value and impact on the organisation.  The self-assessment could also help identify training needs for Members.

Officers had completed the first half of the assessment and invited comments from the Committee.

Members noted, and where necessary, discussed the strengths and weaknesses of each area in the assessment, and concurred with the suggested areas for review or action.

In respect of ‘principles of good governance and decision making’, Members reflected on capturing the positive endorsements from the Corporate Peer Challenge and Best Value Notice review, in respect of the Council’s governance framework and the delivery of its best value duty.  It was suggested that specific training on the Local Code of Corporate Governance might be worth consideration through the Constitution Member Working Party.

Members considered that under the heading of ‘effective control environment’, the addition of levels of assurance achieved in the internal audit of key controls would be beneficial.

The place of AI was queried.  Officers assured the Committee that appropriate AI policies would be put in place first before embarking on its use.

In respect of risk management, it was noted that Officers would bring an update on the risk profile dashboard and submit the annual procurement report to the next scheduled meeting in May.

The Committee discussed the section on supporting External Audit; there was shared frustration over their limited ability despite having done all they could within the system to influence quality or the timeliness of the previous outstanding audits.  Members recalled that a paper on the previous external auditor’s fees would be scrutinised at a future meeting.  Officers would also peruse BDO’s complaints policy.

In respect of Internal Audit, Members commented that sometimes the authority was slow to implement recommendations.  It was agreed to continue the practice of inviting the relevant Corporate Heads to meet the Committee where a ‘limited’ assurance or ‘no assurance’ opinion was given, or where recommendations continued to have their deadlines extended.

In respect of ‘good governance’ Officers aimed to submit the review of the Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy to the next scheduled meeting in May.  It was noted too that the updated Officer Code of Conduct would mirror the Members’ in referencing the Nolan Principles.  Officers also advised that as a result of feedback to the recent central government survey it was likely that the Member Code of Conduct would be revised.

Officers then invited the Committee to discuss and agree scores against the 29 questions forming the high level review of the ‘self-assessment of good practice.’

The questions covered:

·         Audit Committee purpose and governance

·         Functions of the Committee

·         Membership and support

·         Effectiveness of the Committee.

Members were asked to assign a score to each set of questions.  For the majority of areas, Members agreed that no further improvements were necessary.  However, in some areas it was agreed that minor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

OFFICERS' RECOMMENDATION that –

the press and public be excluded from the meeting during discussion of the following report (appendix) under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that the report in question would be likely to involve disclosure of exempt information of the description specified in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

(To resolve)

There was no discussion regarding the exempt appendix to item 10.